Rexon - Any comments ?

[Midnight]

Midnight wrote:
I don't wanna pour scorn on Alfy's link........
Ahh, go on, you do really.

Naaaaaaa...... I'm a rogue.... not a bar steward...



Midnight wrote:
but..... I tried that working *** backwards mess.... didn't work for me....
Okay, I give up. Working *** backwards? Presumably you mean with the board on the skew? I agree, it's not always the best way but Jeff's page is about the only one that explains shooting boards at all, so that's why I picked it. I use both a skewed board and one that's just a glorified bench hook; both work so I don't bother to analyse them much.


If I could persuade my puter to talk to my scanner, I'd post some pics.... but I'll try to explain....

I'd tried numerous web searches for info / pics etc.... struck out every time. Thought there was just enough info in Charlesworth's books to be frustrating.... knowing that these thngs COULD do what I was looking for.... no info for how to build / use them...
The book I listed earlier was a revilation. The only point about them that I haven't been able to work with was the position of the batton that bears against the edge of the bench. Offset to the rear (as shown in both "Improved shooting board" and "improved mitre shooting board" I'd have to place the board and workpiece between me and the plane. Figuring what hours of planing while bent like a pretzil would do to my back was a no brianer; I moved the battons to the front of the boards. Oriented like that, I can work with the plane nearest to me, facing the work. With the workpiece clamped, I've both hands free to work the plane.

If this lot makes any sense.... explain it back to me huh...??? I shoulda been in bed hours ago.....
<getting too auld for this late night stuff....

 

[Scrit]

... the L-N's blade is 4.8mm A2 grade cryogenically hardened fightin steel.......

Midnight

I know what you mean about thicker irons on the L-Ns, after all I do have a couple (Alf: that wasn't a drive-by, was it?) and they do perform better than a standard old Stanley simply because there is less chatter from a thick iron (at least that's my take on it). They also hold an edge well, especially the A2s, although my experience is that a good O1 or W1 tool steel will hold a keener edge although not for as long. I concur with you on the L-Ns (and for that matter Clifton bench planes) being better than old (i.e. pre-1960s) Stanley/Record planes even when the latter are fitted with a decent Ashley Iles/Hock/Veritas et al thick iron and properly tuned, but not THAT much that I'm going to run off and replace my bench planes tomorrow (couldn't afford it anyway). I have tried a couple of my "tuned" thick cutter "oldies" against the equivalent L-Ns and I have to say that there is very little in it. For a tyro unused to fettling their own tools these (new) planes do seem to represent a short cut to good performance without the pain of learning how to fettle planes - but it does come at quite a premium (the price). I was more interested in how well the iron was supported - on an original #9 there is a large section of iron between the bottom of the bed casting and the adjuster mechanism at the rear of the plane where the iron is unsupported and it is my contention that this unsupported section, in conjunction with the flexing of the thinner iron which allows chatter. It might also explain why #9s are sometimes seen with user-made infill blocks.

... I was taking shavings I could read through from inch thick sycamore..... across the grain. Absolutely zero chatter.

I agree that a properly tuned plane should be able to do this (probably all of my user kit can), but have you tried it on timbers which REALLY generate chatter, such as bird's eye maple, indian laurel or purpleheart? They are the real test, after all, sycamore, is a very mild timber

... I'm not supposed to get an edge that smooth...... or am I...??

Ermm, well yes, you are :wink:

... The mouth's adjustable.... how tight do you want it....??

I know it's adjustable (I have the original), but most of the original Stanley's won't give the sub-2mm gap you'll find on many British infill mitre planes. Has Tom Lie-Nielsen corrected this defect? If you can’t get this close then paring end or mitre grain can be seriously compromised.

From use..... the only way I'd improve it would be to add the "hot dog" handle that the original Stanley had...

Depending on who you believe that isn't necessarily true (i.e there is a school of thought which says it wasn’t always supplied new). Certainly enough turn up without handles (or even the shadows where the hot dog casting went) to make one consider that it wasn't regarded as such a hot feature by the original users. If you do want a repro hot dog, there is a guy in Australia who sells copies machined from a solid casting, alternatively a good BRITISH engineering shop should be able to make you one up relatively cheaply...

... 30 hours over 3 days had my tendons protesting about chaffing the upper edges of the body with whichever hand was on the fore grip.

I'd tentatively suggest that you were using the wrong plane for the job. :wink: The whole purpose of a plane like the #9 is to take a single or maybe two final cuts AFTER all the hard work has been done by machinery and bench planes - but hey I have to make a living at this so my take is possibly a bit different.

Scrit

 

[Alf]

easier way.... clamp it...
<shrugs..
saves alla that calibration mess..... leaves me both hands free for the tool... saves all the worry about the piece moving......

Clamp it?! I'd be there all day. I like to gradually advance the work so that it has maximum support from the fence to prevent spelching. But maybe I'm doing it all wrong? I don't think clamping it saves any calibration mess at all, but I'm willing to be disuaded.

I think I grasp what you mean about the "*** backwards" bit, but I reckon it'd turn me pretzel shaped doing it your way! As long as it works for you. You'd have to do it the other way with a donkey's ear though.

Agreed, Scrit. I've always seen the #9 as a final finishing plane, for those last couple of swipes too. Not from personal experience, mind you BTW, is there any reason why you couldn't have a wooden hot dog?

Cheers, Alf

 

[Scrit]

BTW, is there any reason why you couldn't have a wooden hot dog?

The original hotdog was a semi-hollow casting with a slot milled in it and a locking screw (to lock it onto the inside of the body). They are also fairly slim, so probably difficult to achieve in wood. If I can find the URL for the guy in Australia I'll post it.

I also have to agree with you about using a piece of sandpaper to grip work. Clamps tend to get in the way when you are trying to quickly "inch" work forwards - probably why so many Stanley shooting boards have been found minus their work clamps (taken of and forgotten) although I can see the logic of using clamps on a long shooting board.

Scrit

 

[Alf]

I only wondered about the hot dog 'cos only having seen one in The Handplane Book I thought it was wood. Maybe a nice dense tropical might lend itself to the task? Great, an excuse for needing a #9, purely for research purposes. :lol: I notice that Ray Iles has a listing for a #9, "hot dog missing", but says ring for details, so presumably he can provide one (possibly from Australia?). Deary me, I'm going to have to stop reading this thread before I convince myself I need a mitre plane :?

Cheers, Alf

 

[Scrit]

Deary me, I'm going to have to stop reading this thread before I convince myself I need a mitre plane :?

What you really need isn't a mundane #9, but a nice Spiers improved-pattern mitre plane (much more your style with the rosewood infill and snecked iron). Or were you perhaps thinking about the Henley Optical or Karl Holtey improved mitres with adjusters.... :wink:

Scrit

 

[llangatwgnedd]

Alf wrote

Now how on earth did we get here from Rexon tools?! What the heck, it's interesting

Too royal it is
Carry on we are still watching the thread
Look at the amount of views

 

[Midnight]

Scrit....

My apiologies... I misunderstood what you were asking....
I'm sat with the plane in pieces in front of me...

Starting at the front, the throat plate has the capability to close to zero clearance; the adjusting thread is pretty fine pitched making it dead easy to set a real fine throat.
Now then... blade support in the body casting. From the throat, the blade's fully supported (left to right) on a polished bed running 40mm back towards the central screw. From there, a 6mm (approx) cast web extends 18mm back to the boss that the screw is tapped into; further left / right webs extend from the centre line of the boss. All the webs are machined and polished at the same angle as the solid bed. Extending rearward, the next support points for the blade are chamfers cut into the rear upper edge of the main casting.

As for your real test, I'm unlikely to work with the species you've listed in the foreseeable future; call me soft but I prefer to work with locally grown hardwoods. To date I've only let the #9 at the sycamore and a fair bit of tiger oak. That said.... once the project in progress is completed (looooooooooong overdue chop saw station) I've 120 board feet of oak and elm to work my way through before christmass.

I've only seen the hot dog in Garet Hack's book... my interpretation of the material was that it looked like bakelite. As it's purpose was only to protect the hand from the edge of the casting, I don't see why it couldn't be made from another suitable plastic or wood. Certainly nothing fancy enough to justify shipping from Aus...

As for right tool for the job... that's debatable... Granted, much of the time I spent with the plane was tackling multiple learning curves, teaching myself HOW to shoot.... by trial and error... perfecting the 3 boards I built, learning how to get the best from the #9 not to mention the characteristics of both the oak and the sycamore (this was my first time working with either of them). The only plans I had when working on the sycamore / oak project.. were in my minds eye... working with the hand tools as opposed to power tools gave me the ability to slowly creep up to final size... as opposed to cutting to a known dimension. For me... cabinet making is R&R.... my time costs me nothing... I've no deadlines to meet... and I was having ... fun....
<shrugs...
I dare say next time will be different... with the boards perfected and the hands now fully familiar with the habits of the #9, I'll be able to work more.... dare I say... efficiently....??
Rightly or wrongly... I'm interpreting the fact that I've been asked to make another 3 examples of this project to mean that I've managed to get SOMETHING right... even if it took an age to build.

 

[Scrit]

Hi Midnight

Thanks for the information on the L-N #9. Fills in my knowledge gap and convinces me that maybe it will be worthwhile making a journey to one of the WW shows to try out a #9 myself (I'm being cautious, but it does sound like Tom L-N has also improved his #9 over the original). In my case try generally means BUY (oh, my aching wallet). The original hot dogs were in metal, it make look like Bakelite, but the plane pre-dates that wonderful Belgian invention, what you were probably seeing is what the antique trade call "patina" (or light rust?). I'd like to know what is wrong with the side handle that Tom L-N provides - it looks to work rather in the same manner that the side handle on a Record T5 would work. Perhaps Alf or Bug Bear could enlighten us on that score.

As to shooting, if you are jointing boards can I suggest a slightly easier technique? Clamp two boards together, face sides together like book matching, then shoot the joint with a jointer plane. Doing it that way ensures that if you are a degree or two off 90 degrees the boards will still go together perfectly. Again the jointer is really only used for the last three or four strokes, the rest can be done with a jack or fore plane (lighter and easier to handle).

Once again, thanks for the really useful gen.

Scrit

 

[Midnight]

I'd like to know what is wrong with the side handle that Tom L-N provides -
Scrit

That little fore grip may be small in stature.... but the control it gives has to be seen to be believed. Dead comfy too... fits the web of the thumb like a hand in a glove.....

That's partially why I figured I could use the hot dog.... I'm reluctant to give up that kinda control... yet the downside leaves the tendons open to repeated abuse from the edge of the casting... I donno if it's the design..... or me.... I've a history of tendon probs goin way back so I gotta be carefull......

As for the thanks.... you're more than welcome Sir........ helpin each other out is what it's all about...... yea.....??

btw... thanks for the jointing tip..... I'll give it a try next time